By Larry Johnson
closeAuthor: Larry Johnson
Name: Larry Johnson
Email: larry_johnson@earthlink.net
Site: http://NoQuarterUSA.net
About: Larry C. Johnson is a former analyst at the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency, who moved subsequently in 1989 to the U.S. Department of State, where he served four years as the deputy director for transportation security, antiterrorism assistance training, and special operations in the State Department's Office of Counterterrorism. He left government service in October 1993 and set up a consulting business. He currently is the co-owner and CEO of BERG Associates, LLC (Business Exposure Reduction Group) and is an expert in the fields of terrorism, aviation security, and crisis and risk management, and money laundering investigations. Johnson is the founder and main author of No Quarter, a weblog that addresses issues of terrorism and intelligence and politics. NoQuarterUSA was nominated as Best Political Blog of 2008.[1] He has worked as a private consultant on issues of international terrorism and security for the U.S. Government and private companies. Johnson has appeared as a consultant and commentator in many major newspapers and news programs.[2]
Contents [hide]
1 Background
2 Views
2.1 1996
2.2 1998
2.3 1999
2.4 2000
2.5 2001
2.6 2003
2.6.1 Plame affair
2.7 2008
3 Notes
4 References
5 External links
[edit]Background
Larry Johnson moved to Washington, D.C. in 1979 to begin work on a Ph.D. at the American University. Although he completed successfully all coursework and comprehensive exams, he did not write a dissertation. In 1978 and in 1983-85 he worked in Latin America on community development projects as a community organizer. Returning to the United States in 1985 he joined the Central Intelligence Agency, thanks in part to a letter of recommendation from Republican Senator Orrin Hatch (R-UT) that helped to "open doors" for him at the Agency.[3] Johnson entered on duty at the CIA in September 1985 and was a classmate of Valerie Plame. Every member of that class was undercover. After a year in the Career Trainee program, which included a stint with the Afghan Task Force, Johnson was assigned as an analyst in the Middle America Caribbean Division in the Latin American Affairs Office of the Directorate of Intelligence. He received two Exceptional Performance awards and was promoted ultimately to Senior Regional Analyst for Central America.
Johnson remained undercover in the CIA until October 1989, when he resigned from the CIA and started a new job in the Office of Counter Terrorism at the Department of State. Johnson played an instrumental role in launching the Terrorism Rewards program international advertising campaign (working with Diplomatic Security officers Brad Smith and Michael Parks). [4] Johnson also was involved in a variety of crisis management response operations, including the release of hostages from Lebanon and liaison with the Pan Am 103 families. He left government service in October 1993 and started his own business as a consultant.
After leaving government service, Johnson became a frequent guest on many major television news shows when a question of terrorism came up. He was first interviewed by CNN following the capture of Carlos the Jackal. Johnson subsequently appeared on CNN, ABC's Nightline, CBS, the BBC, MSNBC, the Jim Lehrer News Hour, NBC, and NPR. In December of 1999, for example, Johnson was hired by NBC to serve as its terrorist expert for the Y2000 and was in Time Square with Tom Brokaw and Katie Couric ("a lot of fun and the best way to see in the New Year"). Johnson also was hired in January 2002 as a Fox News Analyst and remained under contract until February 2003.
Since 1994 a significant focus of Johnson's consulting work has been with the U.S. military special operations forces in scripting and conducting military counter terrorism exercises. He traveled under orders from the U.S. military to Iraq in May 2006 to work on a short term project.
A registered Republican who supported President Bush in 2000, Johnson became a strong critic of the Bush administration in May 2003 for its conduct of the war in Iraq and, a few months later, for its role in the outing of CIA operative Valerie Plame.[5] He was also featured in the 2004 political documentary Outfoxed: Rupert Murdoch's War on Journalism. Since Robert Novak's controversial disclosure of Valerie Plame as a CIA operative in July 2003, Johnson has contributed to public discourse on intelligence matters, often sparking further controversy. He has been interviewed by both the mass media and the alternative media and published commentaries on a variety of issues, including the Plame affair, the controversy concerning Mary McCarthy, and the resignation of Porter Goss as Director of Central Intelligence.
[edit]Views
This article or section may contain an inappropriate mixture of prose and timeline.
Please help convert this timeline into prose or, if necessary, a list.
[edit]1996
In 1996, Johnson noted that terrorism worldwide was on the decline. "Terrorist incidents [both internationally and in the US] have fallen to levels not seen since the 1970s. Whether measured by the number of incidents, the number of fatalities, or the number of groups, raw statistics demonstrate that the level of terrorist violence has declined since the mid-1980s. In fact, the evidence suggests terrorism was more widespread and deadly 10 years ago."[6]
He also wrote an op-ed piece for the New York Times suggesting that the newer and more deadly terrorist threat to the U.S. was embodied by "networks of terrorists, mostly foreign, working within its borders." Exemplifying this threat was Ramzi Yousef, one of the masterminds behind the 1993 attack on the World Trade Center. In the article, Johnson suggests that enhanced cooperation between intelligence agencies, particularly the FBI and CIA, is mandatory to meet the growing threat of terror networks.[7]
[edit]1998
In 1998, Johnson argued that while overall terrorism was declining, the threat from bin Laden and al-Qaeda should be the focus of American counterterrorism policy:
The nature of the threat posed by Bin Ladin is highlighted by my final chart, number 7. Osama Bin Ladin and individuals associated with him have killed and wounded more Americans than any other group. This chart also illustrates that groups such as Hamas and the Tamil Tigers (LTTE) prior to 1998 have killed more foreigners in the anti-US terrorist attacks. If we take into account the bombings of the US Embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, Osama's status as the most lethal terrorist is certain.[8]
In addition, he told USA Today that bin Laden had participated in "virtually every major attack of terrorism against the United States" in the 1990s. Johnson underlined the threat posed by bin Laden, saying that he was possessed by "hatred and craziness." If left unanswered, "he would continue to terrorize Americans around the world. He has no compunction about killing women and children. He's a complete egalitarian in his murderous attitude."[9]
[edit]1999
In an interview with PBS's Frontline for its 1999 program, Hunting bin Laden, Johnson discussed Osama bin Laden.[10] According to Johnson, Americans had "tended to make Osama bin Laden sort of a superman in Muslim garb." "Actually," he continues, "Osama bin Laden, in my view, represents more of a symptom of a problem, and the problem is this: the Saudi Arabian government, not just Osama bin Laden but many people in Saudi Arabia, have been sending money to radical Islamic groups for years." Johnson continued:
When you look at who's killed Americans in the last 10 years, the individuals he's supported and backed--I'm basing that upon the initial information that's been released in the indictments and conversations with others in the intelligence communities--Osama bin Laden has been the one killing Americans. No other terrorist group in the world has been out killing Americans except for Osama bin Laden.... Osama bin Laden remains out there as the one really targeting us. So, we recognize that he's the threat. He's serious about wanting to kill Americans, but as long as he's in Afghanistan, as long as he doesn't have access to a cell phone, as long as he can't just hop on a plane and travel wherever he wants without fear of being arrested, his ability to plan and conduct terrorist operations is extremely limited. We have to recognize [that] he would like to do a lot of damage. He would like to kill Americans, but wanting to is different from being able to, having the full capabilities in place.[11]
In the interview, Johnson doubted the ability of members of bin Laden's organization to plan and put their lives on the line:
There's not another Ali or Mustafa out there at this point and Osama bin Laden in my view has not been a very effective organizer or leader. He talks a great game and puts out terrific threats as far as stirring the passions in the United States and maybe firing up the imaginations of some young Muslims throughout the world. But when push comes to shove, can he get a group of people who are together who will say: we are going to plan an operation, we're going to put our lives on the line, we're going to go out and try and kill people and we don't care what the consequence is? It hasn't happened.[12]
Frontline asked:
[Is it] ... fair to say what you're saying is that the president of the United States, his national security advisor, his deputy national security advisor for counter-terrorism, are basically blowing smoke [about the danger posed by bin Laden] and his followers]?
Johnson responded:
They're grossly exaggerating the problem. They are hyping it. They shouldn't be talking about rising terrorism. Instead of saying "terrorism's rising," it's not. "Terrorism is spreading," it's not. "More people are dying from terrorism," not the case. But what they should be saying is, "There's one individual out there that really doesn't like us, and he's made it his mission in life to kill Americans, and we've gotta deal with him." But we need to have a voice of reason in that process instead of putting ourselves out crying wolf, because this is essentially what's taking place right now. They call it the administration that cries wolf.[12]
[edit]2000
Johnson co-authored an article in 2000 with Milt Bearden which focused on the threat posed by al-Qaeda specifically, rather than terrorism trends in general. Beardon and Johnson note that new information emerging about the bombings at Kenya and Tanzania in 1998 points to the threat posed by Imad Mugniyah and Osama Bin Laden will require "a coordinated policy that will employ a full range of covert, clandestine, diplomatic, and military operations," concluding:
The Clinton Administration has shot its bolt on the terrorist problem with small effect, and no last minute show of force will change the record. A new administration can start afresh with a more sharply defined set of terrorism goals – Mughniyeh and bin Laden and their protectors for starters – and bring the full, coordinated force of American diplomatic, military, and intelligence capabilities to bear on the problem.[13]
[edit]2001
After Johnson's testimony to the special forum at the U.S. Senate, Gary J. Schmitt, executive director and CEO of the Project for the New American Century, refers in the Daily Standard (blog) to an op-ed piece Johnson wrote two months prior to the 9/11 attacks, claiming that Johnson argued that the US had little to fear from terrorism.[14]
In an editorial entitled "The Declining Terrorist Threat," published in the New York Times on 10 July 2001, Johnson says:
Judging from news reports and the portrayal of villains in our popular entertainment, Americans are bedeviled by fantasies about terrorism. They seem to believe that terrorism is the greatest threat to the United States and that it is becoming more widespread and lethal. They are likely to think that the United States is the most popular target of terrorists. And they almost certainly have the impression that extremist Islamic groups cause most terrorism.... None of these beliefs are based in fact.... While terrorism is not vanquished, in a world where thousands of nuclear warheads are still aimed across the continents, terrorism is not the biggest security challenge confronting the United States, and it should not be portrayed that way.[15]
Ten days after the 9/11 attacks, after quoting the above passage, Timothy Noah concludes a post in his "Chatterbox" feature at Slate: "Johnson's analysis, we now see, was bold, persuasive, and 100 percent wrong."[16] Johnson defended himself against such attacks:
The rightwing is resurrecting an op-ed I wrote in July 2001. I stand by the full article. It is still relevant today. I am accused, incorrectly, of ignoring the threat of terrorism. In fact, I correctly noted that the real threat emanated from Bin Laden and Islamic extremism. President Bush, for his part, ignored the CIA warning in August 2001 that Al Qaeda was posed to strike inside the United States.[17]
After September 11, Johnson appeared several times on FOX News to address the question of military action against terrorism. On 14 November, he defended the FBI's proposal to interview 5,000 students in the U.S. suspected of having information relevant to the September 11 investigations:
I think they should talk to everyone that they feel they have a need to talk to. I mean, look, this is war. This is not a legal proceeding. This isn't the O.J. Simpson trial. The folks that attacked us -- they murdered Americans. And we've got to recognize that in wartime, we should do things differently.[18]
[edit]2003
In January 2003, Johnson wrote an analysis of the relationship between the upcoming U.S. invasion of Iraq and the threat of transnational terrorism. According to Johnson, Bremer's response was to tell him that "it didn't matter what Saddam did or didn't do, we were going to war."[19] The paper warned that an invasion would "do little to destroy the infrastructure of radical Islamic terrorism responsible for the 9-11 attacks." Noting that Saddam Hussein's regime has been a longtime supporter of regional terrorist organizations such as the PLO, Johnson examines contacts between Saddam Hussein and transnational terrorist organizations such as al-Qaeda:
There is no doubt that Iraq is a state sponsor of terrorism—i.e., a country that provides financial support, safe haven, training, or weapons and explosives to groups or individuals that carry out terrorist attacks. . . . According to Central Intelligence Agency data, there is no credible evidence implicating Iraq in any mass casualty terrorist attacks since 1991. . . .
Johnson notes that the period immediately leading up to 2003 saw a rise of activity surrounding terrorist Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, suggesting that "Iraq is willing to help a movement that it would otherwise oppose on ideological grounds. Nonetheless," Johnson concludes, "it is important to understand that Iraqi entreaties to Al Qaeda, are most likely intended as a tactic to bolster Iraq’s ability to fight off a U.S. invasion rather than a deep-seated theological and ideological commitment to the terrorist agenda of Bin Laden.[20]
In that analysis Johnson also warns that the U.S.-led invasion was likely to backfire:
In fact there is a serious risk that a U.S. led war against Iraq may crystallize the diffused anger in the Arab and Muslim world — a heretofore unattained goal of bin Laden and his followers — and persuade more Muslim youths to take up the terrorist banner against America and her citizens.... If we decide to invade Iraq we must be prepared for the contingency that our attack will inspire young Muslims to pursue jihad against the West in general and the United States in particular. Just as the 1979 Soviet invasion of Afghanistan rallied many Muslims, especially young adults to the cause of jihad, a U.S. attack may enable Islamic extremists to attract new followers.[20]
Johnson also gave interviews on the topic of what to do with captured al-Qaeda leaders; while he did not condone torture, he suggested that a "sleep deprivation and reward system" might be useful for getting information from Khalid Sheikh Mohammed:
I don't see a constitutional right to have eight hours of sleep. You shouldn't subject someone to freezing but they don't get to wear mink coats, either.[21]
In May 2003, Johnson joined members of Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS) in condemning the manipulation of intelligence for political purposes:
It is a misuse and abuse of intelligence. The president was being misled. He was ill served by the folks who are supposed to protect him on this. Whether this was witting or unwitting, I don't know, but I'll give him the benefit of the doubt.[22]
[edit]Plame affair
After Robert Novak wrote a column identifying the wife of former ambassador Joseph C. Wilson as a CIA officer, the media invited Johnson to comment on the ensuing scandal because he had been a member of the same Career Trainee class with Valerie Plame Wilson. For example, in October 2003, he appeared on Democracy Now to discuss the Plame affair. He told interviewer Amy Goodman that Valerie Wilson's cover should have been respected whether she was an "analyst" or a "cleaning lady": "if she's undercover she's undercover, period. If the media allows themselves to get distracted with those kinds of curve balls, they ignore the issue."[23]
He told a Senate Democratic Policy Committee in October 2003, "My classmates and I have been betrayed. Together, we have kept the secrets of each other's identities a secret for 18 years. Each and every one of us have kept that secret, whether we were in the CIA, in other government service or in the private sector. But this issue is not just about a blown cover. It is about the destruction of the very essence, the core of human intelligence collection activities: plausible deniability, apparently, for partisan domestic political reasons."[24]
Johnson testified at a special joint hearing of Congressional and Senate Democrats on 22 July 2005 about the consequences arising from the Plame affair.[25]
[edit]2008
In 2008, Johnson emerged as a staunch supporter of Hillary Clinton and a strong critic of Barack Obama. Larry Johnson's blog, NoQuarterUSA, became a rally point for Clinton supporters wary of Barack Obama's qualifications to be president. Supporters of Barack Obama insist that a story that first appeared on Johnson's blog--a report that Republican operatives have a tape of Michelle Obama making racially insenstive comments about caucasians--has been "refuted" Barack Obama's Fight the Smears website.[26]. However, Johnson never claimed to have the tape and reported that the Republican operatives controlling it intended to release the tape sometime after the Democratic Convention in August 2008. On October 21, however, he asserted that the operative in possession of the tape had been instructed by the McCain campaign not to release it.[27]
[edit]Notes
^ http://2008.weblogawards.org/polls/best-political-coverage/
^ Larry C. Johnson, "About Me," No Quarter (personal blog).
^ "Former CIA Official Larry Johnson Delivers Democratic Radio Address," transcript posted on official Democratic National Committee's website for The Democratic Party, July 23, 2005], accessed November 21, 2006.
^ Interview with Larry Johnson, confirmed by his supervisor
^ "Ex-CIA official Blasts Bush on Leak of Operative's Name: Democrats' Radio Address Focuses on White House Aides' Role," CNN July 23, 2005, accessed November 21, 2006.
^ Gail Russell Chaddock, "Why Terrorists Pick On the French," Christian Science Monitor (5 December 1996) p. 1.
^ Larry Johnson, "Terrorists Among Us," New York Times (20 August 1996) p. A19.
^ Terrorism Today
^ Lee Michael Katz, "The Hunt for Bin Laden," USA Today (21 August 1998) p. 1A.
^ See Transcript of original interview with Larry C. Johnson, as broadcast on Frontline in 1999. Cf. "Interview: Larry C. Johnson," for Hunting bin Laden, transcript of interview broadcast on Frontline subsequently on 13 April 2001. See also dedicated PBS webpages for media links: Iraq and the War on Terror, Frontline PBS, online featured programs, accessed 19 November 2006.
^ frontline: hunting bin laden: interviews: larry c. johnson | PBS
^ a b [1].
^ As posted in [2].
^ Gary Schmitt, [ 07/25/2005 "Meet Larry Johnson: The CIA official Turned Democratic Spokesman Has a Pre-9/11 Mindset," Daily Standard (blog), July 25, 2005, accessed November 20, 2006.
^ *Larry C. Johnson, "The Declining Terrorist Threat," The New York Times 10 July 2001: A19.
^ Timothy Noah, "(Not Exactly a) Whopper of the Week: Larry C. Johnson," Chatterbox: Gossip, speculation, and scuttlebutt about politics (blog), hosted by Slate September 21, 2001, accessed November 20, 2006. Note the full context of this quotation:
It is, to be sure, a little bit cheap (and slightly at odds with the usual parameters of this feature) to criticize someone for making an erroneous prediction, particularly after a tragedy. Chatterbox is especially reluctant to tag Johnson because Johnson's op-ed was argued forcefully, backed up meticulously with factual data, and bravely at odds with conventional wisdom at the time of its publication. Add in that Johnson now makes his living as a consultant to corporations about terrorism, and therefore had everything to gain by exaggerating the dangers terrorism poses, and the guy practically looks like a hero. Chatterbox, who two decades ago was an editor for the New York Times op-ed page, would have published Johnson's piece had he still been an editor there this past July. In his capacity at Slate, Chatterbox might well have written up Johnson's prediction, and perhaps even endorsed it.
But boy, is he glad he didn't! Johnson's analysis, we now see, was bold, persuasive, and 100 percent wrong. Sadly, a mistake this embarrassing cannot be ignored. As a fellow skeptic, Chatterbox in all sincerity wishes Johnson better luck next time.
^ Larry C. Johnson, "Johnson vs. President Bush," re-posted and updated by SusanHu at DailyKos (blog) July 25, 2005.
^ FOX News Interview with John Garrett (14 November 2001) Transcript #111405cb.260.
^ [3].
^ a b Larry C. Johnson, "Setting the Record Straight on Iraqi Terrorism," posted in Booman Tribune: A Progressive Community (personal blog) 27 January 2003. accessed 19 November 2006.
^ Qtd. in Toby Harnden, "CIA 'pressure' on al-Qa'eda chief," The London Telegraph 5 March 2003: 16.
^ Qtd. in Nicolas D. Kristof, "Save Our Spooks," The New York Times 30 May 2003:A6.
^ Democracy Now (3 October 2003)[4]
^ U.S. Senate, Democratic Policy Committee Meeting on the CIA Operative Leak, (24 October 2003).
^ Letter to the Senate.[Needs full source citation; see "References" section.]
^ Tumulty, Karen (2008-06-12). "Will Obama's Anti-Rumor Plan Work?", Time Magazine. Retrieved on 20 June 2008.:"a story that apparently first made a big splash on the Internet in late May in a post by pro-Hillary Clinton blogger Larry Johnson"
^ Whitey Tape, API, Phil Berg, and Andy MartinSee Authors Posts (1090) on November 23, 2007 at 2:56 AM in Current Affairs
by
Joe and Valerie Wilson
“I have nothing but contempt and anger for those who betray the trust by exposing the name of our sources. They are, in my view, the most insidious, of traitors.” George Herbert Walker Bush, CIA dedication ceremony, April 26, 1999.
When Bush administration officials I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby, Karl Rove, Richard Armitage and Ari Fleischer betrayed Valerie Plame Wilson’s identity as a covert CIA operations officer, they fell into the category of “the most insidious of traitors.” Now we learn from the President’s former press secretary, Scott McClellan, that the President himself “was involved” in sending him out to lie to the American public about the betrayal. If his direction to McClellan was deliberate and knowing, then the President was party to a conspiracy by senior administration officials to defraud the public. If that isn’t a high crime and misdemeanor then we don’t know what is. And if the President was merely an unwitting accomplice, then who lied to him? What is he doing to punish the person who misled the President to abuse his office? And why is that person still working in the executive branch? Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald made clear his suspicions about the culprit when he said “a cloud remains over the office of the Vice President”. But we may never know exactly what happened because President Bush thwarted justice and guaranteed the success of the cover-up when he commuted Scooter Libby’s felony sentence on four counts of lying, perjury and obstruction of justice.
With the exception of MSNBC’s Keith Olbermann, Chris Matthews, and the intrepid David Shuster, the mainstream media would have you believe that McClellan’s revelation is old news. “Now back to Aruba and the two-year old disappearance of a blond teenager.” But treason is not old news. The Washington press corps, whose pretension is to report and interpret events objectively, has been compromised in this matter as evidence presented in the courtroom demonstrated. Prominent journalists acted as witting agents of Rove, Libby and Armitage and covered up this serious breach of U.S. national security rather than doing their duty as journalists to report it to the public.
So far there is no apparent desire for redemption driving the press to report on the treachery of senior officials. Instead, the mainstream press has compounded its complicity by giving the Bush administration yet another free pass and shifting blame. The New York Times failed to publish an article on McClellan’s revelation and The Washington Post buried it at the end of a column deep on page A-15 in the newspaper. Earlier in the week, Newsweek magazine, owned by the Washington Post Company, proudly announced the identity of its new star columnist—Karl Rove, one of the key actors in this collective treason. Robert Novak, who willfully disclosed Valerie’s identity, having been twice warned not to do so by the CIA, and who transmitted his column to Rove before it was published, remains a regularly featured columnist in The Washington Post.
With nearly 70 percent of the public now believing that our country is on the wrong track, it is no wonder that many feel let down by major institutions, including the Washington press establishment that increasingly resembles the corrupt Soviet propaganda mill. One reporter from a major news organization even asked whether McClellan’s statement wasn’t just “another Wilson publicity stunt.” Try following this tortuous logic: Dick Cheney runs an operation involving senior White House officials designed to betray the identity of a covert CIA officer and the press responds by trying to prove that the Wilsons are publicity seekers. What ever happened to reporting the news? Welcome to “Through the Looking Glass.”
Fearful of its access to the powerful, and defensive about its status in the high school social culture that permeates the capital of the Free World, much of the press has forgotten its responsibility to the public and the Constitution.
Presidents and those who aspired to be president in the past once took strong positions in defense of U.S. national security. Today, Republican presidential candidate Fred Thompson has tried to build his support through fronting for the Scooter Libby Defense fundraising efforts. Meanwhile, other Republican candidates accuse Patrick Fitzgerald of being “a runaway prosecutor” and remain silent about the stain on Bush’s presidency.
Where is the outrage? Where is the “contempt and anger?”
(small, medium and large sizes; for both dogs and cats)
+ 
Good luck Val and Joe.
There’s also a grand indictment of the media regarding the Sibel Edmonds case, which may yet blow the whole treasonous shower out of the water:
http://www.bradblog.com/?p=5260
At this juncture, bloggers, readers and commenters seem to be the sole patriotic voices.
And so, IMHO, we need to use this venue to continue to call for a full investigation, to name the acts as treasonous, and to continue to make as much noise about it until the readers and viewers of the traditional media get the message.
It is probable that traditional media will never cover the story, as it is now controlled by corporations which have interests contrary to that of we the people.
FWIW, I have been commenting on every traditional media venue which allows it, that the Faustian Five (Bush, Cheney, Rove, Card and Libby) are traitors and must be tried as such.
Thank you for writing this.
So let’s get started!
http://www.fantompowa.net/Flame/bush_war_criminal.htm
Yes Larry, one would think the McClellan revelation would have been the lede on pg1 every major newpaper and news outlet.
Rove & Newsweek disgusts me. My mother in law is cancelling her subscription. Ours won’t be renewed either. Thank God we have Joe Galloway and you. HT TruBluMike
Commentary: Good riddance to them all
Joseph L. Galloway | McClatchy Newspapers
last updated: November 21, 2007 06:24:25 PM
There was little for the unindicted co-conspirators of the Bush administration to give thanks for this week as the clock winds down on the 14 months they have left in power.
With former White House press secretary Scott McClellan spilling the beans on who told him to lie to the American people and cover up the White House’s responsibility for the criminal act of revealing the identity of a covert CIA officer, it clearly was time for some folks to begin drafting their requests for presidential pardons.
McClellan, in a forthcoming book that will tell some, if not all, reveals that his 2003 statements absolving top White House aides Karl Rove and I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby of any involvement in leaking the identity of CIA officer Valerie Plame were untrue — and that the orders to make those statements came from President Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney, White House chief of staff Andrew Card, Rove and Libby.
It also confirms long-held suspicions that the whole despicable affair — an attempt to punish former Ambassador Joseph Wilson for debunking a bit of the bogus intelligence the administration wheeled out to justify invading Iraq — was orchestrated in the offices of Bush and Cheney, and with their knowledge.
It also might shed new light on why Bush quickly commuted Cheney’s hatchet man Libby’s prison sentence after he was convicted on four counts of lying to federal investigators. It simply wouldn’t do to have Libby rolling over on his bosses.
Somehow, I have a strong feeling that this isn’t the only or the last revelation of wrong-doing and criminality that we’re likely to hear before and after Bush and Co. leave office, or that additional presidential acts of clemency will be needed to spare other top administration officials from prison and buy their silence.
What we’ve witnessed and endured during seven long years of the Bush presidency is the inevitable consequence of bringing vicious and unprincipled but successful political campaigners — attack dogs — into top White House jobs.
cont’d
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/galloway/v-print/story/21921.html
Would impeachment prevent pardons?
GB
good question GB. here’s another: can the treason pres grant blanket pardons for crimes being investigated but not charged before he slinks out of town? if not we should hope any investigation takes plenty of time. if so, impeachment is imperative. don’t the media and the spineless dems realize we are in danger of losing our republic? or am I just a crazy extremist?
another question: is the special prosecuter still in business? I ask because we know the next pres will not go after pinhead. either because he is a repug (kiss the USA as we have proudly known it g’bye), or because she won’t face the political fallout; accusations of payback, bitchiness, etc. bloomberg anyone?
Maybe Fitzgerald should have subpoenaed McClellan (who I recall as being a particularly inept and tongue-tied spokesman).
Probably Fitzgerald (certainly no friend of the White House) concluded that McClellan had nothing.
McClellan’s publisher wants to sell books.
This is America; follow the money.
“Where is the outrage, where is the contempt and anger.”
Joe and Valerie,
I personally share your outrage and anger as many of us do here at NQ, but ultimately, our outrage, it’s not enough. That is what I find so frustrating. WHAT CAN WE DO?!!!!
The blogs are an important tool and people like Matthews, Olbermann, and Schuster see what we all see, but then, a brick wall. We have got to find that one loose string and start pulling.
Your case keeps popping up and never really goes away, as it shouldn’t. Its quite obvious, even before McClellan’s book revelation, that this went all the way to the Oval Office via the VP’s office.
By the way Valerie, I sent a strongly worded letter to Larry King for cutting your segment short. That really pissed me off.
PS. If a Democrat is elected in 2008, I hope they make you Director of the CIA. As they say, payback is a bitch.
Is this a loose thread that should be tested? Armitage says he received the info that Valerie was CIA in a memo -who was the source of that memo? Another point of note from the Libby investigation was the notation, or comment, by Libby stating that revealing her would “cause problems at CIA” -indicating she was “knowingly” exposed, right? Maybe Fitz didn’t think that was strong enough to convict, but, to me, pretty damning…
Rick
“Where is the outrage? Where is the “contempt and anger?”
Joe and Valerie,
Firstly, I just want to say that the both of you are the definition of true patriots in my book and I have so much respect for the both of you. Saying thanks for your service to our country, just doesn’t seem to be enough.
I too share your outrage as many of us do here at NQ, but ultimately, our outrage, it’s not enough. That is what I find so frustrating. The blogs and especially Larry’s, are an important tool. People like Matthews, Schuster and Olbermann see what we all see, then it seems to hit a brick wall. WHAT CAN WE DO?!!!!
McClellan’s revelations only confirm what the rest of us already knew - this goes straight to the Oval Office via the VP’s office.
We have got to find that one loose string and pull…….
By the way Valerie, I sent a strongly worded and terse letter to Larry King for cutting your segment short. That really pissed me off.
I hope that the next administration will make you the Director of the CIA. You know the old saying, payback is a bitch.
Larry is there a posting problem? I’ve tried twice now.
Waiting in Texas,
For some reason your first comment was in the spam filter. I recovered it for you. But you’ve got about 4 or 5 duplicate comments?
Leslie-I emailed Larry about the duplicates as I was having problems this morning when trying to post. Please accept my apologies for the duplicate posts. Can you remove them?
“Where is the outrage? Where is the “contempt and anger?”
Joe and Valerie,
Firstly, I just want to say that the both of you are the definition of true patriots in my book and I have so much respect for the both of you. Saying thanks for your service to our country, just doesn’t seem to be enough.
I too share your outrage as many of us do here at NQ, but ultimately, our outrage, it’s not enough. That is what I find so frustrating. The blogs and especially Larry’s, are an important tool. People like Matthews, Schuster and Olbermann see what we all see, then it seems to hit a brick wall. WHAT CAN WE DO?!!!!
McClellan’s revelations only confirm what the rest of us already knew - this goes straight to the Oval Office via the VP’s office.
We have got to find that one loose string and pull…….
By the way Valerie, I sent a strongly worded and terse letter to Larry King for cutting your segment short. That really pissed me off.
I hope that the next administration will make you the Director of the CIA. You know the old saying, payback is a bitch.
Accepting a Pardon is an admission of guilt, and that would make Dubya party to the act.
He’d be under contempt and subject charges for that.
Thus the Commutation.
Fitzgerald is Counsel past Dubya’s days in office. He can follow up on the Pardon list.
Bring It On.
“Where is the outrage? Where is the “contempt and anger?”
Joe and Valerie,
Firstly, I just want to say that the both of you are the definition of true patriots in my book and I have so much respect for the both of you. Saying thanks for your service to our country, just doesn’t seem to be enough.
I too share your outrage as many of us do here at NQ, but ultimately, our outrage, it’s not enough. That is what I find so frustrating. The blogs and especially Larry’s, are an important tool. People like Matthews, Schuster and Olbermann see what we all see, then it seems to hit a brick wall. WHAT CAN WE DO?!!!!
McClellan’s revelations only confirm what the rest of us already knew - this goes straight to the Oval Office via the VP’s office.
We have got to find that one loose string and pull…….
By the way Valerie, I sent a strongly worded and terse letter to Larry King for cutting your segment short. That really pissed me off!
I hope that the next administration will make you the Director of the CIA. You know the old saying, payback is a bitch.
As for Sibel Edmonds,
She should simply have her lawyer state everything she plans on saying.
Attorney Client Privilege.
That is a Constitutional guarantee of right.
Let’s see which Judge shits all over the very framework of the legal system to enforce Bushco.’s Boy-King act as precedence.
A person cannot tell thier Counsel that someone else is breaking the law, and have that Lawyer state so, in public or on the record?
“Where is the outrage? Where is the “contempt and anger?”
Joe and Valerie,
Firstly, I just want to say that the both of you are the definition of true patriots in my book and I have so much respect for the both of you. Saying thanks for your service to our country, just doesn’t seem to be enough.
I too share your outrage as many of us do here at NQ, but ultimately, our outrage, it’s not enough. That is what I find so frustrating. The blogs and especially Larry’s, are an important tool. People like Matthews, Schuster and Olbermann see what we all see, then it seems to hit a brick wall. WHAT CAN WE DO?!!!!
McClellan’s revelations only confirm what the rest of us already know - IMO, this goes straight to the Oval Office via the VP’s office.
We have got to find that one loose string and pull…….
By the way Valerie, I sent a strongly worded and terse letter to Larry King for cutting your segment short. That really pissed me off.
I hope that the next administration will make you the Director of the CIA. You know the old saying, payback is a bitch.
The lamestream media is so compromised and corrupt it is creaking and decaying before our eyes.
Bob Novak should be driven into the swamps and the Bush cabal should stand trial for high crimes and misdemeanors.
If America was the America that we knew and loved. Sadly it has been twisted beyond recognition by a small pack of traitors.
Thanks for your dedication to the Old America, Mr. Ambassador and Mrs. Wilson.
-GSD
Out an undercover CIA agent (Rove, Fleisher, Libby, Novak, Cheney) and continue to repeat “packs of lies” all over US airwaves. Lie about a blowjob under oath and get impeached. This is justice in the USA…and the whole world is watching even if most Americans try to stay asleep.
Hey, only 50% of us are sleeping
(sigh)
This is still the most important story we have going in this country. It is relevant to everything else because it shows they will lie about treason. Our government will lie to the courts and the people about having committed treason.
If they will do that, how can we not suspect the same people are agents of a foreign power? They are actively doing all they can to destroy the country, but no one is willing to consider they are working for someone else to loot the treasury?
They have to have a place to go after they are indicted here in our country, or they have to declare martial law and try to run the coup that ends this country. Countries without extradition treaties.
it was treason. it is treason to allow them to remain in power.
Belief Bias and Perseverance.
I think that it’s just too much for the media who so recklessly assisted this administration in their lies, to fully admit and report on their crimes. And the public is too brainwashed, too busy shopping, to wrap their minds around it all.
Thank you Joe and Valerie for your Patriotism, and contined service to this Country. Your honesty and fortitude in facing this corrupt and deceitful administration is an act of heroism to be cherished and emulated. I wish you both joy and happiness in all you do…
This truly was an act of terrorism and TREASON. And I too have to wonder about another countries involvement in the inner walls of our government. Bush’s family ties to former Nazis and his family relations with Saudi Arabia, give one to pause. Esp in light of the planeload of Saudis whisked out of the US on Nov. 12…
Val, thank you for your book, and telling your story. I thought it was VERY well done, and I hope you will write more books in the future…
Unfortunately, many other govt workers as well as private sector workers have had these kinds of nightmares occur to them as well… Yours was different, in that it involves treason, and it should not go unpunished one day longer. I pray your success in bringing the guilty to justice.
Mario Cumo issued a call to 2,000 of the most influential lawyers in the US to
TAKE THEIR PROTESTS TO THE STREETS —
“If US lawyers are marching in the streets in support of the rule of law in Pakistan……. why aren’t we marching in support of the rule of law here?”
Perhaps, perhaps…the tide will change?
See link below for details.
http://www.firedoglake.com/2007/11/23/our-lady-of-the-law/#more-13065
Fearful of its access to the powerful, and defensive about its status in the high school social culture that permeates the capital of the Free World, much of the press has forgotten its responsibility to the public and the Constitution.
Truth, (small ‘t’ please). That is the responsibilty of the press. Sorry, they simply have no other.
If the Constitution is contradictory to itself (and it is sometimes), they are required to point it out, and if the public is likewise, they are likewise required to grind the public’s nose in that fact.
But you can’t sell newspapers that way, and you can’t get net share that way, and our stockholders won’t stand for it.
Yes, I know. But there it is.
Truth.
One reporter from a major news organization even asked whether McClellan’s statement wasn’t just “another Wilson publicity stunt.”
Jeez Louise. Anybody know who said this? C’mon, dammit, Name names.
INCOMING>>>>>>
I concur with “reggie” in that the censorship of Sibel Edmonds’ attempt to expose the corruption of the Justice Department is indicative of the collusion between our corporate owned/controlled media and our national government. While her situation and that of Valerie Plame Wilson differs in substance, it is what they have in common that is the most troublesome; namely that they are being prevented from telling the truth about corruption at high levels in our government by the very officials that have been practicing the corruption. It is time that we as a people put an end to our government officials being allowed to hide their treasonous and criminal acts behind the veil of “national secrecy privilege” once and for all!
I say let’s put all of the dirty secrets on the proverbial table, continuing our misplaced loyalty to the current system of secrecy is not protecting the United States and it’s people, it is aiding and abetting the very people that are corrupting all of our public institutions. How is it that intelligent and educated people have come to believe that it is acceptable to fear telling the truth, and patriotic to adhere to promises that facilitate corruption and crimes against humanity?
With the exception of MSNBC’s Keith Olbermann, Chris Matthews,
I just reread the piece, and burst out laughing.
Chris Matthews?
Seriously, Chris Mattthews?
I just checked my calendar, and it’s not 1 Apr. But I am starting to smell a tuna.
You obviously do not watch Matthews. He has been hammering hard for four years. Hi furious that loyal and naive soldiers have died based on a “pack of lies”. He was one of the first mainstreamers to go into Walter Reed and air numerous shows on returning and injured soldiers. Don’t get me wrong I do not agree with everything Matthews says or his focus at times. But there is no fucking doubt that he has been hammering about the substantiated claims about Iran, the seriousness of the outing of Plame, the commuting of Libby, etc. etc. He realizes he was partially duped before the invasion and part of the “groupthink” that went on before the illegal and immoral invasion (although he was not as bad as some) Hell I swear the right wing zealots will not even come on his program any longer.
Turn on the lights and turn on Matthews and then you might have a leg to stand on. That fish you smell must be your very own thinking rotting.
Yeah, Chris Matthews is a real gem! He’s the guy who before the attack on Afghanistan was bitching loudly and stridently about how it was going to spoil everything when Afghan people would respond to U.S. bombing attacks by running out of their tents (the racist ignoramus doesn’t realize that Afghans don’t live in tents) waving their bloody hands, creating a P.R. problem for the U.S. How thoughtless of Afghan people for not being more accommodating by remaining quietly in their “tents” and not showing anyone the human consequences of bombing countries.
Sorry, that racist a****** doesn’t have anything to say that could possibly interest me.
Thanks for that, Shirin, and by way of reminder, folks: Tweety is from Planet Showbiz. He’s not a journalsit.
Just reread it again. The language in this piece is inconsistent with previous writings of Joe Wilson. It’s just not his “style”.
Larry?
I’ll be sure to tell Joe that the piece he sent me, from his personal email, was not written by him. Chris, what drugs you using dude? Lighten up.
Thanks for that, Larry, I am well rebuked. [hangs head in sorrow]
Now explain his affinity for Chris Matthews.
I’m serious. It’s wildly inconsistent with who he is and what he and Val have done.
If you think I’m crazy based on what I’ve already written, you’re in for a treat, ’cause now I’m gonna go way, way out on a limb.
You are the recipient of Joe’s application to work at MSNBC as commentator. Read it again. There’s no other way to explain it.
Let me put it another way: Joe and Val have each, in their respective ways, been schooled in the art of understated and effective persuasion.
This is neither. It’s bomb throwing.
I again contend: Joe and Valerie had no hand in this.
Larry?
Chris,
What is your problem? Who died and made you an expert on the Wilsons’s writing style?
The Wilsons are contributors to this blog, and Larry is friends with them.
Leslie writes: What is your problem? Who died and made you an expert on the Wilsons’s writing style?
Nobody, I hope. Nevertheless, I’ve read enough of Joe’s writing, and heard enough of his speaking, to say what I did. Again, I smell a tuna.
Larry?
[laughing}Leslie?
Joe? Valerie? [laughing]
And another thing: Both Joe and Val speak, and write, in sentences. The weird run-on thing provided does not do this.
Larry?
The government should be shut down and this investigated and prosecuted, period.
All I keep hearing is that impeachment is a distraction. AS A MATTER OF FACT,
Valerie Wilson said this herself last month in Portland Oregon at her book tour date there.
She was asked by a member of the audience what she thought about the impeachment proceedings against Dick Cheney.
I was there and heard it myself.
I would not have believed it if I had not personally heard it.
The lady has the patience of a saint.
I thought about asking her if she had ever considered just calling up Cheney and asking him to go quail hunting.
I swear the Republicans could take the 2008 election if they led the Impeachment of Cheney train. Well RAmsey Clark and Kucinich have been on this for years now, but you know the Republicans could spin it like it was their idea.
What a kick in the ass this would be for most of the Democrats who have not had the balls to push for Impeachment.
We know the Republicans would not be doing it for the right reasons (they had the chance) but what the hell….would like to see the Impeachment train leave the station.
Have yet to see an article in the New York Times about McClellan dropping his truth bomb on the Bush administration. Although I did not go through it page by page today. Nothing on Washington Journal the last several mornings.
I remember hearing Zbigniew Brezinski asking “where is the outrage” a few years ago.
I witnessed plenty of outrage at the anti-invasion marches in )Oct 2002, Nov or Dec 2002 and then in February 2003 in New York City. At all three of these anti-invasion marches, WWII, Korean, Vietnam, Desert Storm Vets, families pushing baby strollers and seniors in wheel chairs, plumbers, teachers, social workers, lawyers, Republicans (I talked to plenty) students ete marched against the invasion. Hundreds of folks I audio and video taped expressed well informed opinions based on what they were hearing from Scott Ritter, former Cia analyst, Iaea’s El Baradei etc. When the MSm did cover these marches they would show the same footage of some pot smoking folks or the 20 black hooded anarchist on the evening news over and over again. (I was watching the news carefully) I did not see or hear one Vet or soccer mom interviewed for the evening news. Anyone sitting at home with questions about the invasion only saw the most radical fringe shown on the National news. While hundreds of thousands (millions accumulatively) of middle americans marched against the invasion. Oh did the MSM fail the country.
Chris Matthews has been ripping it up for the last four years digging deep, along with Olberman, and Diane Rehm who was on it before the invasion and continues to be one of the more well balanced news programs (even though I wish she was harder on folks and would dig deeper sometimes, she is by far one of the best)
IF OUR JUSTICE SYSTEM WERE JUST KARL ROVE, ARI FLEISHER, SCOOTER LIBBY, CHENEY WOULD BE IN PRISON FOR OUTING PLAME. DOUGLAS FEITH, WOLFOWITZ, DAVID WURMSER, RHODE, BOLTON LEDEEN WOULD BE IN PRISON FOR CREATING AND DESSIMINATING FALSE WMD INTELLIGENCE.
Wonder if Senator Rockefeller will ever complete Phase II of the SSCI? Will we ever witness anyone held accountable for starting a war based on false intelligence?
Joe and Valerie Plame Wilson we are marching right behind you. Thank you for your patriotism your examples and please let us know what we can do besides hounding our Reps in regard to justice and accountability in your case and so many more cases of corruption and deceipt that has been oozing out of this administration since they were selected by the US Supreme Court.
Thank you Larry for all you do also.
Bill Mahers interview with Plame/Wilson was one of the best
http://youtube.com/watch?v=2mdo8spVr64
Along with Chris Matthews interview with Valerie
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-GENUilnfD0
Matthews keeps hammering on how many in the press do not seem to get that an extremely serious crime has been committed
katie Courics interview was weak at best. She tried to paint Valerie’s outing as Valeries fault. Couric obsiously does not get how serious this outing is.
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2007/10/21/valerie-plame-on-60-minutes-the-president-is-not-a-man-of-his-word/
Katie was such an ass when she said to Joe Wilson “your still mad, your seething” as if Joe Wilson should be over that his wife Valerie who had put her own life on the line and had been outed by the Bush administration should just get over it. Couric was such an ass when she acted as if Joe’s “outrage” was somehow not justified
terri Gross did the same thing during her interview with Valerie trying to paint it as if Valerie’s outing was her own doing.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=15553270
As larry has pointed out the majority of the MSMers do not seem to get it.
Thank you for this eloquent piece. Where (indeed) is the outrage?
Together with the Sibel Edmonds’ evidence, the treason in outing Valerie Plame during a time of war (they created, but still…) are, surely, THE most serious collections of wrongdoing/crimes in the history of this country.
That there is collusion in covering it up — by not just Bush&Co….but also the Congress and the mainstream media…..is nothing less than shocking. That fact alone will go down in history, I believe.
Knowledgeable people….being silenced. It’s incredible, really, the number of crimes committed by this administration. Including crimes against humanity. To think W is pondering his “legacy”! His “library”! If that’s not mental illness…what is?
Valerie and Joe,
It’s wonderful to have you both stop by. Thank you for your courage, patriotism, fortitude and above all real Leadership - a quality sadly missing in our broken government in DC.
Your comment:
It is there. What’s amazing to me is the depth and breadth of the anger, contempt and disgust pervasive across all class and educational lines in our country. Being a “child” of the late 60’s and early 70’s, I have NEVER seen such feelings of anger and powerlessnes in my lifetime.
I’d like to ask a couple of quick questions for both of you:
1. When will you be coming to New England for a book event? As an inducement - Northern New England has real challenging skiing - none of that sissy powdery stuff like out west!
2. Have either of you thought of running for Pete Domenici’s Senate seat? Heather Wilson has so much baggage one of you could easily knock her off and our country will be all the better for it.
Again, Thanks for everything you do. You both are stellar examples to all on how to “hang tough” and do so with grace and elan.
RE: Treason
Please see:
http://johnmccarthy90066.tripod.com/id48.html
http://johnmccarthy90066.tripod.com/id258.html
Related articles are located in the left column of each page.
Bests,
John
Treason is NOT old news.
Thank you for a powerful article and Season’s Best to you both.
Are the preemptive invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq war crimes? If yes, why? If no, why not?
JMc - those acts are not specific enough to constitute prosecutable war crimes. But they WERE acts of aggression. Legally speaking, not morally speaking.
How is the unprovoked invasion and subsequent occupation of a sovereign state not specific enough to constitute a war crime? Wars of aggression are, in fact, deemed under international law to be the ultimate war crime - you could say the “mother of all war crimes” - is it not?
Surely the unprovoked aggression against Iraq would qualify if it had been done by, say, Iran.
Because, you can’t indict an entire nation, you can only indict on specific crimes - not general themes.
You are right in that legally states do not commit war crimes, individual people do. You are also right that legally you need a specific crime, not some kind of generality.
However, I don’t think anyone here is suggesting indicting the United States of America based on some “general theme”. I believe the people here are suggesting indicting the actual individuals who committed the very specific war crimes, starting with Bush, Cheney, et al., who have without a doubt committed the big daddy of all war crimes - a war of aggression.
I wish to thank The Wilson’s for their long and dedicated service to this nation.
How much for a congressman? Ask one thats in jail.
How much for a President? Ask Henry Kissenger or the House of Saud.
How much for any American to defend thier principles and the constitution? Priceless.
I am outraged that the “we the people” are not out in the streets yelling and demanding the rule of law ie: this country; be defended and restored. I am no longer upset with the “criminals” “we the people” are allowing this “highjacking” to continue!
You said, ” the mainstream media would have you believe that McClellan’s revelation is old news.” They’re not the only ones. I wrote this, Where are the Headlines? , and was chastised by some bloggers who said that McClellan didn’t really implicate Bush, Cheney, etc. in his release. I’d somehow misread the snip from his book. Of course, Associated press lead and still has this headline: Former Aide Blames Bush for Leak Deceit. And then there’s the English language.
We’re beyond 1984 at this point. The lack of coverage and second guessing takes the entire event off the record for a while. However, those who read sites like this and email it to their 100 friends are replacing the news. Word will get out. It would be so much better if the simple story could be told commensurate with its significance.
Well, I cant agree more.